>>>>> "Simon" == Simon Phipps <webmink at sun.com> writes: >>>>> "Ben" == Ben Rockwood writes:
Ben> Regarding 4.2: Ben> * This seems needless, excessive, and dangerious. "violates the Ben> Community's norms"? That's very scary. My objection to Section 4.2 is that it puts the *entire* process around expulsion--the community's highest form of sanction--into an easily modified process document. I can see not wanting to hardwire too much detail into the Constitution, but I'd like to see some sort of baseline. Such a baseline would give examples of what merits expulsion (e.g., repeated suspensions for the same behavior) and who decides (I lean towards a community vote). Simon> Would you propose dropping the whole of section 4.2? I might Simon> agree with that. I don't think dropping Section 4.2 helps. It would either have no effect (sanctioning would up to some OGB process document) or it would make matters worse (sanctioning would be ad-hoc). mike
